Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes you know who you are! Your two dogs mauled the face of a cat and left it with a broken jaw, teeth hanging out, bleeding and with a brain injury that it was no longer able to stand. We had to rush with this poor stray cat to the 24 hour vets last night for it only to be put down. It's actually worrying that if one of my house mates hadn't witnessed the incident you'd have the left the cat to die on the pavement. You cruel cruel man! :( *rant over*

Thats horrific. The poor little cat. And also it is terrible that you were faced with dealing with it. I feel sick to think what pain the little cat went through.


Can we say what the man looks like on here? What type of dogs he had? What he wore?

That's disgusting and so sad. What a vile, evil man. He must be local to there, can he be identified and reported? I'm not suggesting a witch hunt on here but wondering if your housemate would recognise him again and if he regularly walks this way.


Sounds horrific, the dogs should at least be muzzled and he should not be permitted to keep dogs!

This is awlful, Makes me wonder what type of dogs they were? I have a staffy cross who is a gentle loving dog! yet they get a bad name! I wouldnt be supprised if they were jack russels or some small dog! My dog gets attack at the park by small breads! Just proves its not the breed! its how the owners make them. My heart gose out to that poor little cat! may he rest in peace in animal heaven.

Defo agree with susierose, i bet they were bull terrier breeds of which i have one and mine is so stupidly soft! It really is how the owners raise them as mine was re-homed from a rescue to centre to me and i totally changed his behaviour around!

Lets hope this doesnt give these breed's yet another bad name.

Poor little cat

I think they were Jack Russell Terriers. He refused to give us his name and details. But apparently he walks his dogs around here all the time. He has no control over the dogs. One of them tried to attack my house mate whilst she was trying to rescue the cat.

I've PMed InScarlet with some info as to who it might be.


I don't want to leap to the wrong conclusions here but IF the dogs were Jack Russells there is an older man who lives very locally who walks 2 Jack Russells off lead down Ondine Road and is often on Goose Green. There was a similar incident a couple of months agowith this man and his dogs but luckily the cat was quick and unharmed. He was asked to keep his dogs on a lead and he said he would but only 2 days ago I saw him with one dog off lead on Grove Vale.


The dogs are normally lovely friendly dogs but are terriers so if off lead & see a cat they will chase. How can we stop this happening again?

So many problems like this might be avoided if only people would keep their dogs on a lead when walking outside of the park or private property. I get incensed when people let their dogs off to walk beside them on the pavement, it causes problems all round.


The OP is right, many dogs, but particularly terriers, will try to chase a cat- if they can. In the same way, many cats will stalk and kill a bird or mouse if able. That is just nature. It is down to owners to understand the type of dog they have, the risk it presents to other animals and to control it in public places accordingly.

JohnL,


Sorry, I don't agree- it depends on the dog. Some are just born highly reactive and with a strong prey drive. Think what most terriers were originally developed for, to go after small furries. Of course, you can try to breed for a more laid back temperament all round, but you still get throwbacks.


I'd also say that a big tomcat would be able to best quite a few small dogs. I've seen dogs chased down the street by a tomcat. However, some terriers are so wired that they'll just go after anything no matter what the consequences- they're predisposed to.

I had a terrier (maltese) who was a massive softie - but the minute she saw a larger dog, she'd go nuts. Smaller dogs were of no interest to her. She was always on a lead, but I dont know what she thought she'd achieve by going after a huge dog!!!


I agree on part about what you say its to do with the owners and how their dogs behave, some been bred to be vicious, giving other dogs a bad name. But our little dog was a little lady, our house is so quiet etc., it wasnt our behaviour around her which made her so cross when she saw a bigger dog. I dont get it.


That man is completely horrible and irresponsible though, if he knows he cannot control his dogs, they should be on a lead all the time. He is not a responsible owner and the dogs should be removed from his care, if he is not looking out for them.


It is in different animals nature to behave in certain ways, and if they by nature act it out, because their owner is not responsible, then I don't think dogs should be punished. I know this is not what the thread is about (dogs should be put asleep etc if they bite), it truly makes me sad to hear about dogs been put asleep because they've bitten simply because the owners are neglecting them in terms of behaviour training and/or because they are not on a lead or properly monitored.

Owners have to take account of the type of dog they have. If I have a terrier I know that it may have a strong prey drive, so I take that into account when training, harnessing those drives and instincts in more community friendly ways, like teaching the pup/dog to chase balls, do scent work and so on.


If I have a Staff or other bull breed type, I know that I have to do a lot of work in terms of socializing him/her with other dogs, understanding how to interact and how to play without causing a bust up. Staffs are often bad at communicating with other dogs and both give off and get mixed messages. Ditto prey drive with other dogs.


If I have a wary/guardy breed like a GSD, an Akita or Dobermann, I know I have to work hard to socialize them around people and life in general so they learn to understand what they need to react to and what they don't.


If I have a Husky I know I'm going to probably have to keep it on the lead most of the time as they are not great at recall. They can also easily scale a 7 foot fence.


The list goes on. The onus is always on the owner. In most cases, various breeds or types of dogs, have evolved to perform a function and that gives massive clues as to how easily they will integrate into your lifestyle and what training/socialization they'll need. There are always exceptions and there are always extremes in terms of breed/type traits.

Poor cat :( thats so sad, why do people insist on walking along streets with there dogs off lead? Its just cocky. I would be worried about my dogs being killed by a car at the least. Isn't it against the law to be offlead on the street/road?

HI BB,


The law is a mess on that score and I hope they get it sorted soon. It would be one of the simplest remedies. My understanding, though I am happy to be corrected, is that you can walk a dog offlead on a pavement provided it is under control (presumably a dog that goes after a cat is not under control- but this is not a given). However, I beleive that under the local bylaws you cannot cross a public road unless your dog is on a lead. So if the man concerned was observed crossing a road dogs off lead that my be grounds for prosecution.


With regard to the cat, because it is a stray I just don't know. Cats like dogs are viewed as property and the damage is to your property- I think. In terms of DDA it is a tough one as has already been argued, aggression to a cat is not the same thing at all as aggression to a human and a perfectly lovely dog in every other way may go for a cat it does not live with. To argue that this proves it could also go for a child is erroneous and would not stand up in court.


If there are any lawyers out there who know the law it would be good to know if it would be possible to prosecute the man in question and on what grounds.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...